11 thoughts on “Monday Message Board”

I am sure interested readers will have different views on the import of this article or rather of the import of the trend it identifies.

My initial comment would be that the trend seems to be another important aspect of the overall trends to deregulation, privatization, oligopilization, monopolization and corporatism of the globalized economy. One can imagine a hyper-privatized capitalism where public company investment no longer occurs. Public stock companies would be become obsolete. Rather, all capital and capital investment would be entirely private and by invitation within, essentially, a cabal structure. Stock markets would cease to exist and the operations of capital would become entirely opaque except to the privileged circle of major private capital holders. The form of government by that stage would be, and would have to be, corporate dictatorship to complete and enable the running of such a system. Are we headed in this direction?

If people find this discussion interesting and want to discuss it at length, we could take it to a sandpit.

Townsville Council has dropped their plan to give $18.5 million of ratepayers’ money to Adani’s private airstrip!

A spokeswoman for Adani said they remained committed to Townsville.
“We look forward to Townsville and Rockhampton being vibrant and prosperous communities and home to our future mine employees and their families,” the spokeswoman said.
“Townsville City Council has told us they will re-engage with Adani in order to guarantee 750 long-term mine jobs will be based in the city, as soon as we confirm financing for the Carmichael Project is in place…

I like Tanya Plibersek. She is compassionate, honest, sharp and articulate and would make a great Labor leader. Bill Shorten doesn’t present well and is not popular with the public. Shorten’s unpopularity may mean we get another Lib federal government.

I would like Tanya Plibersek to be jettisoned into the leadership as soon as possible. Shorten should step down and Plibersek should be allowed to run in the membership ballot uncontested- sorry Anthony Albanese, you don’t cut it.

Bill Shorten is a bit wooden but a bit smarter than I originally thought he was. At the same time, he can make dumb political gaffes as he did recently. The real issue however is not Bill or Tanya or leader personality politics. The issue is how beholden are Labor to corporate donations? The answer is “very” just as it is with the LNP. Until we toss out Liberal and Labor to vote in Greens and avowed Socialists we don’t stand a chance of changing anything fundamental. We desperately need fundamental change to avert eco-catastrophe.

Anonymous,
I think the odds will favour Shorten in the actual campaign conditions. He “flogged” Turnbull at the only pre-election debate permitted by Turnbull. Don’t forget Malcolm’s dummy spit late on election night when a lot would have been in bed.
I was reading Shorten’s lengthy evidence on the 28/7/16 ? to the Trade Union Royal Commission and despite the obvious bias in the Commissioner and the Counsel assisting he handled himself brilliantly making Stoljer look a bit desperate to get his man though failing in the process.

Advert for a blog post (****samefacts.com/2018/07/international-affairs/coal-crash-in-india/), the sole point of which is to reproduce a deadly chart from IEEFA on the collapse of new build coal generation in India. Given the time lags, the raw numbers understate the financial swing.

Here is as good a place as any to announce that I will not be posting on J.Q.’s blog again. I need to research and consolidate my thinking in other arenas. These arenas do not touch on conventional economics except so far as to fully critique and reject it as a discipline in its entirety. For me to keep critiquing conventional economics or related matters on an economist’s blog just becomes gratuitous, repetitious, nonsensical and snarky.

I don’t accept the a priori assumptions and dogmas of conventional economics any more than I accept the a priori assumptions and dogmas of, for example, Christian Theology. Under such conditions of complete disagreement about fundamental a priori assumptions and research methods, debate is pointless for both sides. J.Q. should please feel free to delete any of my recent posts, which from my side, demonstrate this futile “talking past each other” nature.

@Ikonoclast Sorry to be slow responding, and sorry to see you go. I agree that this isn’t a good place to debate fundamental issues in conventional economics, but you have made a lot of useful contributions on other issues. Feel free to continue doing so if you wish.